[Fwd: Re: [plug] Reply-to headers]

[Bret Busby]

Now, this is where I think it starts to get confusing.

The header of the message below, as shown in Netscape 4.7, with
View->Headers->Normal, is
"Subject:                 Re: [plug] Reply-to headers
 Resent-Date:             Wed, 9 Aug 2000 16:32:04 +0800 (WST)
 Resent-From:             plug at plug.linux.org.au
       Date:             Wed, 9 Aug 2000 16:34:02 +0800
       From:             "Brian Tombleson" <Brian at ParadigmIT.com.au>
         To:             <plug at plug.linux.org.au>
  References:            1 , 2
"
which gives no indication of to where a reply will go, but, as the
message shows "Resent from" the mailing list, it is logical to assume
that a reply will go to the list. (maybe the experts know otherwise,
but, it must be remembered, that we are not all experts, hence the need
for mailing lists, such as this)

However, using the Forward facility, as below, shows that a reply will
go to the originator of the message.

I think that simplicity is lost.

Also, I note that the header above, shows that the "Reply To" has been
deleted from the mailing list.

I assume that we who wanted the Reply To to overrride, lost, and, the
people who wanted the Reply To deleted altogether, won, Matt?

Bret Busby
....................

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [plug] Reply-to headers
Resent-Date: Wed,  9 Aug 2000 16:32:04 +0800 (WST)
Resent-From: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 16:34:02 +0800
From: "Brian Tombleson" <Brian at ParadigmIT.com.au>
Reply-To: "Brian Tombleson" <Brian at ParadigmIT.com.au>
To: <plug at plug.linux.org.au>
References:
<Pine.LNX.4.21.0008091221480.5889-100000 at salween.golden.wattle.id.au>
<399111B4.427882EF at durbanet.co.za>


> I'm using Netscape, and I don't have the problem Garth has. Occasionally
> a reply defaults to the author rather than the list, but normally to the
> list.

This is precisely the reason a standard (any standard) should be reached
so
you don't get 'sometimes it does this, and sometimes it does that' ..
predictable behaviour is my choice, almost regardless of what that
behaviour
is.

The original page that Matt posted a link to explained that (in their
oppinioned theory): 'reply' should have gone to the individual and
'reply to
all|group' should gave gone to the list.

The only reason this thread is here is because it does both at different
times.

The only reason I can see to differentiate between whether 'reply' goes
to
sender or list is either:
  1. Idiosyncracy with sender's Mail Clients, or
  2. Manually setting a 'Reply-To' header.
.. neither of which are within the control of the person responding to a
message.

Just my 2c worth.

- Brian.

......................